BRAF V600E immunohistochemistry is reliable in primary and metastatic colorectal carcinoma regardless of treatment status and shows high intratumoral homogeneity

High-grade Anaplastic Transformation of Ovarian Serous Borderline Tumor: A Distinctive Morphology With Abundant Dense Eosinophilic Cytoplasm and Dismal Prognosis

Ovarian serous borderline tumors (SBTs) have a generally favorable prognosis. Although the risk of progression to low-grade serous carcinoma is well documented, progression to high-grade carcinoma is rare. We report the clinicopathologic features of seven SBTs, each associated with the presence of a morphologically unique high-grade component with an extremely dismal prognosis. All of the SBTs exhibited typical hierarchical branching and scattered eosinophilic cells, whereas the high-grade component consisted of a profuse proliferation of epithelioid cells with abundant dense, eosinophilic cytoplasm, variable nuclear pleomorphism, and evident loss of WT1, estrogen receptor, and p16 positivity. In most cases, the SBT demonstrated an abrupt transition to the high-grade component, but one patient initially presented with the usual SBT and developed a recurrent disease that was composed entirely of the high-grade component. Targeted next-generation sequencing revealed identical driver mutations in both the SBT and high-grade components (BRAF in 3, KRAS in 1), confirming clonality. Three cases, in addition, harbored telomerase reverse transcriptase promoter mutations in both components. One case, despite insufficient material for sequencing, was BRAF V600E-positive by immunohistochemistry. Most patients with available follow-up data died within 9 months of diagnosis. This study confirms prior reports of ovarian SBT transformation to high-grade carcinoma and further characterizes a distinct subset with abundant dense eosinophilic cytoplasm and an extremely dismal prognosis. The presence of BRAF mutations in a major subset of these tumors questions the notion that BRAF is associated with senescent eosinophilic cells and improved outcomes in SBT. The role of the additional telomerase reverse transcriptase promoter mutations merits further investigation.

Deciphering the Role of BRAFV600E Immunohistochemistry in Breast Lesions: A Comprehensive Review

The BRAFV600E mutation has been extensively studied in various cancers, but its role in breast lesions remains less understood. Immunohistochemistry (IHC) has emerged as a valuable tool for detecting BRAFV600E expression in breast tissue, aiding in diagnosis and prognosis. This comprehensive review examines the significance of BRAFV600E IHC in breast lesions, encompassing its frequency, association with clinicopathological features, and potential clinical implications. We summarize key findings, emphasizing their utility in diagnosis, prognosis prediction, and treatment response assessment. Additionally, we discuss implications for clinical practice, highlighting the need for integrating BRAFV600E IHC into diagnostic algorithms. Recommendations for future research include larger-scale studies to validate findings, optimize detection techniques, and explore therapeutic interventions targeting BRAFV600E in breast cancer. This review contributes to understanding the molecular landscape of breast lesions and informs clinical decision-making in their management.

BRAFV600E immunohistochemistry can reliably substitute BRAF molecular testing in the Lynch syndrome screening algorithm in colorectal cancer

AIMS

The Lynch syndrome (LS) screening algorithm requires BRAF testing as a fundamental step to distinguish sporadic from LS-associated colorectal carcinomas (CRC). BRAF testing by immunohistochemistry (IHC) has shown variable results in the literature. Our aim was to analyse concordance between BRAFV600E IHC and BRAF molecular analysis in a large, mono-institutional CRC whole-slide, case series with laboratory validation.

METHODS AND RESULTS

MisMatch repair (MMR) protein (hMLH1, hPMS2, hMSH2, and hMSH6) and BRAFV600E IHC were performed on all unselected cases of surgically resected CRCs (2018-2023). An in-house validation study for BRAFV600E IHC was performed in order to obtain optimal IHC stains. BRAFVV600E IHC was considered negative (score 0), positive (scores 2-3), and equivocal (score 1). Interobserver differences in BRAFV600E IHC scoring were noted in the first 150 cases prospectively collected. Nine-hundred and ninety CRCs cases (830 proficient (p)MMR/160 deficient (d)MMR) were included and all cases performed BRAFV600E IHC (BRAFV600E IHC-positive 13.5% of all series; 66.3% dMMR cases; 3.4% pMMR cases), while 333 also went to BRAF mutation analysis. Optimal agreement in IHC scoring between pathologists (P < 0.0001) was seen; concordance between BRAFV600E IHC and BRAF molecular analysis was extremely high (sensitivity 99.1%, specificity 99.5%; PPV 99.1%, and NPV 99.5%). Discordant cases were reevaluated; 1 score 3 + IHC/wildtype case was an interpretation error and one score 0 IHC/mutated case was related to heterogenous BRAFV600E IHC expression. Among the 12 IHC-equivocal score 1+ cases (which require BRAF molecular analysis), three were BRAF-mutated and nine BRAF-wildtype.

CONCLUSION

BRAFV600E IHC can be used as a reliable surrogate of molecular testing after stringent in-house validation.

Immunohistochemical detection of cancer genetic abnormalities

New applications of immunohistochemistry (IHC) expand rapidly due to the development of molecular analyses and an increased understanding of molecular biology. IHC becomes much more important as a screening or even a confirmatory test for molecular changes in cancer. The past decades have witnessed the release of many immunohistochemical markers of the new generation. The novel markers have extensively high specificity and sensitivity for the detection of genetic abnormalities. In addition to diagnostic utility, IHC has been validated to be a practical tool in terms of treatments, especially molecular targeted therapy. In this review, we first describe the common alterations of protein IHC staining in human cancer: overexpression, underexpression, or loss of expression and altered staining pattern. Next, we examine the relationship between staining patterns and genetic aberrations regarding both conventional and novel IHC markers. We also mention current mutant-specific and fusion-specific antibodies and their concordance with molecular techniques. We then describe the basic molecular mechanisms from genetic events to corresponding protein expression patterns (membranous, cytoplasmic, or nuclear patterns). Finally, we shortly discuss the applications of immunohistochemistry in molecular targeted therapy. IHC markers can serve as a complementary or companion diagnostic test to provide valuable information for targeted therapy. Moreover, immunohistochemistry is also crucial as a companion diagnostic test in immunotherapy. The increased number of IHC novel antibodies is broadening its application in anti-cancer therapies.

BRAF V600E immunohistochemistry as a useful tool in the diagnosis of melanomas with ambiguous morphologies and immunophenotypes

We report three melanoma cases in which BRAF V600E immunohistochemistry (IHC) was valuable for diagnosis. Patient 1: In a patient with a history of primary melanoma on the chest and metastatic melanoma to right breast after undergoing multiple local and systemic therapies, a lung metastasis exhibited chondroid differentiation, aberrant myofibroblastic marker expression, and rare pancytokeratin positivity, without melanocytic marker expression. Patient 2: After targeted and immunotherapy for primary melanoma on the scalp as well as regional and distant metastatic melanoma, an omental metastasis showed CDX2-positive glandular structures that were negative for melanocytic markers. It was initially misdiagnosed as primary gastrointestinal adenocarcinoma. Patient 3: A patient with history of melanoma showing epithelioid morphology on the right thigh presented with multiple soft tissue nodules on skin, lymph nodes and internal organs after being lost to follow-up for 4 years. A biopsy specimen from the right thigh showed spindled cells with scattered pancytokeratin cocktail positivity and ambiguous staining for melanocytic markers. For melanomas with ambiguous morphologies and/or immunophenotypes in each of the three patients, BRAF V600E expression by IHC was maintained in both primary and metastatic melanoma specimens examined. These cases highlight the utility of BRAF V600E IHC in the diagnosis of melanoma.

Factors affecting the accuracy of anti-BRAF V600E immunohistochemistry results in ameloblastomas

BACKGROUND

There are still some controversies about the results of anti-BRAF V600E-specific antibody immunohistochemistry in ameloblastomas. This study aimed to examine the accuracy of V600E-specific antibody immunohistochemistry in detection of BRAF V600E mutation in ameloblastoma tissue sections of different ages.

METHODS

The BRAF V600E status of 64 ameloblastoma specimens was assessed using both Sanger sequencing and V600E-specific antibody immunohistochemistry, and the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were calculated. The difference in V600E-specific antibody immunohistochemistry staining intensity among the three groups of ameloblastoma tissue blocks of different ages was evaluated by chi-square test. The consistency between V600E-specific antibody immunohistochemistry and DNA sequencing results and the V600E-specific antibody immunohistochemistry staining intensity of 15 paired newly-cut and 3-month storage sections of the same 15 ameloblastomas were also compared.

RESULTS

For detection of BRAF V600E mutation, the V600E-specific antibody immunohistochemistry had high sensitivity (98.21% 55/56), specificity (87.5% 7/8), positive predictive value (98.21% 55/56), and negative predictive value (87.5% 7/8). Heterogeneity of the staining intensity was observed in the same tissue section, but all or none expression pattern was noticed in the solid tumor nests. The storage time of paraffin tissue blocks ranging from 2 to 14 years did not affect the V600E-specific antibody-positive staining intensity. However, the three-month storage sections showed a significant diminishment of V600E-specific antibody-positive staining signals.

CONCLUSIONS

The BRAF V600E-specific antibody immunohistochemistry is suitable for routine detection of BRAF V600E mutation in ameloblastomas. The all or none expression pattern suggests the BRAF V600E mutation may be an early event in the pathogenesis of ameloblastoma.

The diagnostic utility of BRAF VE1 mutation-specific immunohistochemistry in ameloblastoma

Ameloblastoma is a benign, locally aggressive odontogenic neoplasm with variable solid and cystic morphology. On account of its histologic variety, diagnostically challenging cases can bear resemblance to odontogenic keratocyst/keratocystic odontogenic tumor (KCOT) or dentigerous cyst (DC). BRAF^V600E mutation has been reported to be specific for and frequent in ameloblastoma, and this study evaluated the usefulness of immunohistochemistry (IHC) using the BRAF VE1 mutant-specific antibody as a diagnostic adjunct in this setting. We investigated 46 ameloblastomas, 30 KCOTs, and 30 DCs. BRAF VE1 IHC was performed on all cases and allele-specific polymerase chain reaction (AS-PCR) for BRAF^V600E mutation was performed on 30 ameloblastomas and any IHC-positive KCOT/DC. BRAF VE1 IHC was positive in 31/37 (83.8%) mandibular ameloblastomas but not in any maxillary ameloblastomas (0/9), KCOT (0/30), or DC (0/30). Equivocal staining was seen in 1/37 (3.3%) mandibular ameloblastomas. Of the 30 ameloblastomas subjected to AS-PCR, BRAF^V600E mutation was identified in 19/23 (82.6%) mandibular ameloblastomas and 0/7 (0.0%) maxillary ameloblastomas. BRAF^V600E mutant ameloblastomas were positive by IHC in 18/19 (94.7%) cases and equivocal in 1/19 (5.3%) cases. All 11 (100.0%) BRAF-wild type ameloblastomas were negative by IHC. BRAF VE1 is an excellent tool for the diagnosis of mandibular ameloblastoma but of limited utility in the maxilla, where it less commonly occurs and where BRAF^V600E mutation is considerably less frequent.

BRAF-mutated colorectal adenocarcinomas: pathological heterogeneity and clinical implications

Advances in molecular biology have markedly increased our understanding of the heterogeneous molecular landscape of colorectal cancer (CRC). Up to 15% of CRCs harbor the BRAF p.V600E somatic mutation (BRAFmt), a well-established negative prognostic marker in patients with metastatic CRC (mCRC). The BEACON CRC trial set a new standard of care in patients with progressive BRAFmt cancers, consisting of the combination of encorafenib and cetuximab. On these bases, BRAF mutational testing is now recommended in patients with mCRC. However, efforts are needed to further stratify patients carrying this mutation. Here, we discuss the heterogeneous pathologic and molecular landscape of BRAFmt CRCs, focusing on the promises and pitfalls of molecular diagnostics, on novel biomarkers to improve patients' stratification and on the current diagnostic scenario for CRC. We believe that a better stratification based on histopathological features and novel molecular biomarkers should be performed to optimize patient management and therapeutic decision-making.

Immunohistochemistry as predictive and prognostic markers for gastrointestinal malignancies

Biomarkers play a key role in the comprehensive pathologic evaluation of gastrointestinal malignancies. These biomarkers can be predictive, indicating whether a tumor is likely to respond to a particular therapy, or prognostic, providing information about the likely course and outcome of a disease. This review article will discuss available immunohistochemical stains for assessing these markers, including staining rationale, scoring criteria, associated systemic therapies, and pictorial examples. PD-L1, HER2, and mismatch repair status can be evaluated via immunohistochemistry for esophageal, gastric, and colorectal carcinomas. Biomarkers currently play a more limited role in evaluation of pancreatic and small bowel malignancies. Immunohistochemistry can also be used to evaluate biomarker status in gastrointestinal stromal tumors, gastrointestinal malignancies with NTRK gene fusions, and undifferentiated carcinomas with switch-sucrose non-fermentable complex abnormalities.

The Contribution of Evolutionary Game Theory to Understanding and Treating Cancer

Evolutionary game theory mathematically conceptualizes and analyzes biological interactions where one's fitness not only depends on one's own traits, but also on the traits of others. Typically, the individuals are not overtly rational and do not select, but rather inherit their traits. Cancer can be framed as such an evolutionary game, as it is composed of cells of heterogeneous types undergoing frequency-dependent selection. In this article, we first summarize existing works where evolutionary game theory has been employed in modeling cancer and improving its treatment. Some of these game-theoretic models suggest how one could anticipate and steer cancer's eco-evolutionary dynamics into states more desirable for the patient via evolutionary therapies. Such therapies offer great promise for increasing patient survival and decreasing drug toxicity, as demonstrated by some recent studies and clinical trials. We discuss clinical relevance of the existing game-theoretic models of cancer and its treatment, and opportunities for future applications. Moreover, we discuss the developments in cancer biology that are needed to better utilize the full potential of game-theoretic models. Ultimately, we demonstrate that viewing tumors with evolutionary game theory has medically useful implications that can inform and create a lockstep between empirical findings and mathematical modeling. We suggest that cancer progression is an evolutionary competition between different cell types and therefore needs to be viewed as an evolutionary game.

Epithelial-Stromal Polyps of the Colon Are Not Perineuriomas

OBJECTIVES

Some colorectal polyps contain serrated or tubular crypts surrounded by whorls of spindle cells that expand the mucosa. These epithelial-stromal polyps have been termed benign fibroblastic polyps or, more commonly, perineuriomas. We hypothesized that these lesions are pathogenetically heterogeneous polyps that share in common exuberant fibroblastic proliferations derived from the pericryptal sheath.

METHODS

Forty-six epithelial-stromal polyps containing serrated crypts (n = 21) and nonserrated crypts (n = 25) were evaluated with epithelial membrane antigen and BRAF V600E immunohistochemical stains, and a subset was subjected to next-generation sequencing for BRAF mutations. Polyp morphology and immunohistochemical results were correlated with clinical information.

RESULTS

Epithelial-stromal polyps containing serrated crypts were significantly associated with other sessile serrated polyps (43%, P = .01) and hyperplastic polyps (29%, P = .006). They also showed BRAF V600E abnormalities (95%) and strong, patchy epithelial membrane antigen staining of spindle cells (95%). In contrast, polyps with nonserrated crypts lacked BRAF alterations and infrequently showed robust EMA staining of stromal cells (16%, P < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

Benign epithelial-stromal polyps with serrated epithelium are biologically similar to sessile serrated polyps and should be classified as such to ensure appropriate clinical surveillance. The nature of polyps without serrated crypts is less clear, but evidence that they are perineuriomas is circumstantial at best.

Preliminary Study on the Identification of BRAFV600E Mutation in Colorectal Cancer by Near-Infrared Spectroscopy

Introduction

In metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), the B-type Raf kinase (BRAF)^V600E mutation is a molecular biomarker of poor prognosis and is of great importance to drug target. Currently, the commonly used methods for detecting BRAF^V600E mutation include immunohistochemistry (IHC) and gene sequencing, but both present certain limitations. Near-infrared (NIR) spectroscopy is a spectroscopy technology that takes advantage of the electromagnetic wavelength between visible light and mid-infrared light.

Methods

IHC was used to detect the expression of BRAF^V600E protein with the BRAF^V600E (VE1) antibody in 42 cases of paraffin-embedded (FFPE) mCRC tissue sections. The NIR-discriminant analysis model (NIRS-DA) was established using 6 cases of wild-type and 6 cases of mutant-type BRAF specimens.

Results

IHC detection results revealed 13 cases of weakly positive (+), 1 case of moderately positive (++), and 28 cases of negative (-) CRC. Compared with the next-generation sequencing (NGS) results, the positive rate was 66.7%. The classification accuracy of calibration (CAC) was 100% compared with the results of NGS, demonstrating that the BRAF^V600E mutant NIRS-DA model, verified by 2 cases of wild-type and 2 cases of mutant-type CRC samples was established. The NIRS-DA model was used to predict gene mutation in the CRC samples, 7 cases were positive (+), and 35 cases were negative (-), and the classification accuracy of prediction (CAP) was 83.3% (35/42).

Discussion

The NIRS-DA model-predicted results were in high agreement with the detection results of NGS, and the difference in IHC is not statistically significant (P>0.05). However, this study is a preliminary discussion on a methodology due to its small sample size.

BRAF V600E Expression by Immunohistochemistry in Colon Cancer and Clinico-pathologic Features Associated with BRAF-Mutated Colonic Cancers in Mexican Patients

BACKGROUND

BRAF evaluation is currently limited to molecular techniques, which are expensive and not widely available to practicing pathologists. Our objective was to determine the diagnostic performance of immunohistochemistry (IHC) against BRAF V600E for BRAF mutation and the secondary objective was determining histopathological characteristics of colon carcinomas with BRAF mutated.

METHODS

Cases of adenocarcinoma of the colon with a known BRAF mutation status were identified from the pathological files of our institution.

RESULTS

We analyzed 135 cases, 13 cases had the BRAF mutation (9.6%) and 122 were non-mutated. The mutated cases expressed intense and diffusely the anti-antibody against BRAF V600E, and 119 (97.5%) of the 122 cases without mutation were negative and the remaining 3 were focal and weakly positive. The IHC demonstrated a sensitivity of 100%, specificity of 97.5%, positive predictive value of 81.3% (95% CI = 56.9 to 93.4%), negative predictive value of 100% (95% CI = 89 to 100%), and an overall accuracy of 97.8%. The only significant clinicopathological differences between cancers with BRAF mutated compared with BRAF non-mutated were that mutated had less lymph node metastases (23% vs. 68.1%) and the tumor size was greater (median 90 mm vs. 60 mm). The survival between groups was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

IHC against BRAF V600E showed an excellent performance, making it feasible as an alternative for molecular examination. Tumors with BRAF mutated did not show distinctive clinico-pathological characteristics, except for a larger tumor size.

Effect of immediate cold formalin fixation on phosphoprotein IHC tumor biomarker signal in liver tumors using a cold transport device

Phosphoproteins are the key indicators of signaling network pathway activation. Many disease treatment therapies are designed to inhibit these pathways and effective diagnostics are required to evaluate the efficacy of these treatments. Phosphoprotein IHC have been impractical for diagnostics due to inconsistent results occurring from technical limitations. We have designed and tested a novel cold transport device and rapid cold plus warm formalin fixation protocol using phosphoproteins IHC. We collected 50 liver tumors that were split into two experimental conditions: 2 + 2 rapid fixation (2 hours cold then 2 hour warm formalin) or 4 hour room-temperature formalin. We analyzed primary hepatocellular carcinoma (n = 10) and metastatic gastrointestinal tumors (n = 28) for phosphoprotein IHC markers pAKT, pERK, pSRC, pSTAT3, and pSMAD2 and compared them to slides obtained from the clinical blocks. Expression of pERK and pSRC, present in the metastatic colorectal carcinoma, were better preserved with the rapid processing protocol while pSTAT3 expression was detected in hepatocellular carcinoma. Differences in pSMAD2 expression were difficult to detect due to the ubiquitous nature of protein expression. There were only 3 cases expressing pAKT and all exhibited a dramatic loss of signal for the standard clinical workflow. The rapid cold preservation shows improvement in phosphoprotein preservation.

Immunohistochemical Study Using Monoclonal VE1 Antibody Can Substitute the Molecular Tests for Apprehension of BRAF V600E Mutation in Patients with Non-small-Cell Lung Carcinoma

In patients with non-small-cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC), the analysis of BRAF V600E mutation has become more and more applied since the introduction of many mutation-targeted medications. In this regard, the advantage of immunohistochemistry (IHC) as a reliable diagnostic test substitute to other molecular studies has not been approved yet. Objective. To examine the dependability of using immunohistochemical method utilizing monoclonal VE1 antibody in the detection of BRAF V600 E mutation in patients with non-small-cell lung carcinoma and compare the results there with that of polymerase chain reaction (SSCP-PCR). Materials and Methods. We retrospectively identified 53 patients of whom their histopathological diagnosis was non-small-cell carcinoma of different types. Evaluation of BRAF V600E mutation was assessed using polymerase chain reaction (SSCP-PCR) and IHC using VE1 antibody. This approach was applied to all cases under the study. Results. Among the 53 NSCLC samples, only 5 (9.3%) cases harbored BRAF V600E mutation, 80% were of adenocarcinoma type, and the rest (20%) was of squamous cell carcinoma. IHC analysis for VE1 was positive in 4 out of 5 (80%) BRAF-mutated tumors and negative in all nonmutated BRAF V600 E NSCLC. Conclusion. Our results revealed that VE1 antibody IHC analysis is a promising technique that can be used to detect BRAF V600-mutated NSCLC with relatively high specificity and sensitivity and might become a potential alternative to the current molecular biological methods that are in use for this purpose.

Current and emerging biomarkers in metastatic colorectal cancer

Background

The incorporation of novel biomarkers into therapy selection for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mcrc) has significantly improved outcomes. Optimal treatment planning now takes into account diverse characteristics of patients and their tumours to create personalized therapeutic plans.

Discussion

This review is split into two sections. In the first section, we review the prognostic and predictive significance of expanded RAS mutation testing, BRAF mutations, ERBB2 (her2) amplification, microsatellite instability (msi) and deficient mismatch repair (dmmr) protein, NTRK fusions, PIK3CA mutations, and met amplifications. The therapeutic implication of each of those biomarkers for personalizing therapies for each patient with mcrc is discussed. In the second section, we touch on testing methods and considerations of relevance to clinicians when they interpret companion diagnostics meant to guide therapy selection. The advantages and pitfalls of various methods are evaluated, and we also look at the potential of liquid biopsies and circulating tumour dna (ctdna) to change the landscape of therapeutic choice and biologic understanding of the disease.

Summary

Routine testing for extended RAS, BRAF, dmmr or high msi, and NTRK fusions is necessary to determine the best sequencing of chemotherapy and biologic agents for patients with mcrc. Although next-generation sequencing and ctdna are increasingly being adopted, other techniques such as immunohistochemistry retain their relevance in detection of her2 amplification, NTRK fusions, and dmmr.

Molecular testing in metastatic colorectal adenocarcinoma cytology cell pellets

BACKGROUND

Mutational status for KRAS, NRAS, and BRAF genes should be performed on all colorectal carcinoma (CRC) specimens in order to guide targeted therapy selection for metastatic disease. Mutations are typically assessed via polymerase chain reaction and/or next generation sequencing (NGS) on formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissues. With minimally invasive diagnostic methodologies, the cytology cell pellet obtained by fine-needle aspiration (FNA) can serve as an alternative source of tumor deoxyribonucleic acid.

METHODS

An electronic record review of the cytopathology files (CoPathPlus, Cerner Corp., North Kansas City, Missouri) from September 1, 2015 through December 31, 2018 was conducted. All cytology specimens obtained via FNA and diagnosed as metastatic CRC on which NGS was performed were included. NGS for KRAS, NRAS, and BRAF mutations using the AmpliSeq Cancer Hotspot Panel v2.0 kit (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, Massachusetts) was performed on cytology cell pellets.

RESULTS

Forty-eight cases were identified. Forty-six of 48 specimens (96%) were adequate for molecular testing. Of those adequate specimens, proportion of malignant cells in the sample ranged from 5% to 95% (mean 46%). Twenty-seven of 48 cases (56%) were positive for clinically relevant mutations. Twenty-four of 27 cases (89%) were positive for KRAS mutations, with exon 2 most frequently involved (22/24 cases, 92%). Two of 27 cases (7%) were positive for NRAS mutations and one case (1/27, 4%) was positive for a BRAF mutation involving codon 594.

CONCLUSION

Mutational analysis performed on cytology cell pellets serves as a useful means of gathering clinically actionable information on tumor mutation status in metastatic CRC.

Validation of Immunohistochemistry for the Detection of BRAF V600E-Mutated Lung Adenocarcinomas

BRAF V600E mutation, a missense mutation in exon 15 resulting in valine substitution for glutamate at position 600 within the kinase domain of BRAF oncogene, is found in a subset of lung adenocarcinoma (ADC). The usefulness of immunohistochemistry (IHC) as an alternative diagnostic tool has not been validated. Moreover, the clinical information of patients with BRAF V600E-mutated lung ADC is limited. We retrospectively identified 31 lung ADCs diagnosed with BRAF V600E mutation by standard molecular sequencing methods and reviewed their clinical characteristics and pathological features. An anti-BRAF V600E monoclonal VE1 antibody for IHC was used to confirm the expression patterns. The series was comprised of 99 cases, 29 with BRAF V600E mutation and 70 without BRAF V600E but with other types or undetected mutations. The majority of BRAF V600E-mutated biopsied tissues were poorly differentiated and micropapillary patterns. Application of the IHC VE1 assay was highly feasible in primary/metastatic sites or effusion blocks, yielding positive findings in 28 of 29 (96.6%) BRAF V600E-mutated tumors and negative results in 69 of 70 (98.6%) tumors harboring other types or undetected mutations. Patients who received pemetrexed/platinum-based rather than mutation-targeted chemotherapy as the first-line therapy for metastatic disease showed median overall survival of 15.5 months. Our findings indicated that VE1 antibody-based IHC analysis demonstrated high sensitivity and specificity to detect BRAF V600E-mutated lung ADCs in tissues from primary or metastatic sites.

Clinicopathologic and Molecular Characteristics of Synchronous Colorectal Carcinoma With Mismatch Repair Deficiency

Synchronous colorectal carcinoma (CRC) is a unique disease associated with a high prevalence (∼35%) of microsatellite instability and occasionally with Lynch syndrome. The clinicopathologic and molecular features of synchronous CRC are poorly understood, particularly in Japanese patients. We examined 118 Japanese patients (236 tumors) with synchronous CRC and 117 Japanese patients (117 tumors) with solitary CRC with immunohistochemical staining for TP53 and mismatch repair (MMR) protein (MLH1, MSH2, PMS2, and MSH6) and mutation analyses of KRAS and BRAF genes. The results revealed no significant differences in clinicopathologic, histologic, and molecular findings between the synchronous and solitary CRC groups. Among the 118 synchronous CRC patients, 15 (12.7%) showed loss of MMR protein(s) expression in at least 1 tumor, whereas 103 (87.3%) showed intact expression of all 4 MMR proteins in both tumors. Of note, all patients with MMR deficiency had excellent prognoses. The 15 patients were further subdivided into 2 groups: the Concordant group, with concordant MMR loss (n=9, 7.6%) and the Discordant group, with discordant MMR loss (n=6, 5.1%). The Concordant patients showed concurrent MLH1/PMS2 loss (n=3), concurrent MSH2/MSH6 loss (n=4) and isolated MSH6 loss (n=2) in both tumors, whereas the Discordant patients showed concurrent MLH1/PMS2 loss (n=2), isolated PMS2 loss (n=2) and isolated MSH6 loss (n=2) in a single tumor. On the basis of the MMR expression pattern and BRAF mutation, the Concordant and Discordant groups were suspected to include Lynch syndrome, Lynch-like syndrome and sporadic MLH1 promoter hypermethylated CRC. In addition, KRAS mutation was present in only 1 tumor in a single patient in each group. In conclusion, the frequency of MMR protein deficiency in synchronous CRC in the Japanese population may be lower compared with the reported data from Western populations. MMR protein loss and KRAS and BRAF mutations in synchronous CRCs were heterogenous even in an individual patient.

Mismatch repair deficiency assessment by immunohistochemistry: for Lynch syndrome screening and beyond

While mismatch repair (MMR) deficiency has been studied extensively, the assessment of MMR status in colorectal and other cancers remains highly relevant, particularly in light of recent data demonstrating that MMR deficiency is a strong predictor for treatment benefit with immune checkpoint inhibitors across multiple tumor types. In colorectal cancer, there is a growing consensus in support of routine MMR testing for Lynch syndrome screening, to inform prognosis and adjuvant chemotherapy use in early stage disease, and to predict response to immunotherapy in advanced disease. Here, we provide a review of the Ventana MMR Immunohistochemistry Panel, which was recently approved by the US FDA for use in Lynch syndrome screening.

Utility of BRAF VE1 Immunohistochemistry as a Screening Tool for Colorectal Cancer Harboring BRAF V600E Mutation

Background

BRAF mutation has been recognized as an important biomarker of colorectal cancer (CRC) for targeted therapy and prognosis prediction. However, sequencing for every CRC case is not cost-effective. An antibody specific for BRAF V600E mutant protein has been introduced, and we thus examined the utility of BRAF VE1 immunohistochemistry for evaluating BRAF mutations in CRC.

Methods

Fifty-one BRAF-mutated CRCs and 100 age and sexmatched BRAF wild-type CRCs between 2005 and 2015 were selected from the archives of Asan Medical Center. Tissue microarrays were constructed and stained with BRAF VE1 antibody.

Results

Forty-nine of the 51 BRAF-mutant CRCs (96.1%) showed more than moderate cytoplasmic staining, except for two weakly stained cases. Six of 100 BRAF wild-type cases also stained positive with BRAF VE1 antibody; four stained weakly and two stained moderately. Normal colonic crypts showed nonspecific weak staining, and a few CRC cases exhibited moderate nuclear reactivity (3 BRAF-mutant and 10 BRAF wild-type cases). BRAF-mutated CRC patients had higher pathologic stages and worse survival than BRAF wild-type patients.

Conclusions

BRAF VE1 immunohistochemistry showed high sensitivity and specificity, but occasional nonspecific staining in tumor cell nuclei and normal colonic crypts may limit their routine clinical use. Thus, BRAF VE1 immunohistochemistry may be a useful screening tool for BRAF V600E mutation in CRCs, provided that additional sequencing studies can be done to confirm the mutation in BRAF VE1 antibody-positive cases.

Immunohistochemistry with Anti-BRAF V600E (VE1) Mouse Monoclonal Antibody is a Sensitive Method for Detection of the BRAF V600E Mutation in Colon Cancer: Evaluation of 120 Cases with and without KRAS Mutation and Literature Review

The major aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of anti-BRAF V600E (VE1) antibody in colorectal tumors with and without KRAS mutation. KRAS and BRAF are two major oncogenic drivers of colorectal cancer (CRC) that have been frequently described as mutually exclusive, thus the BRAF V600E mutation is not expected to be present in the cases with KRAS mutation. In addition, a review of 25 studies comparing immunohistochemistry (IHC) using the anti-BRAF V600E (VE1) antibody with BRAF V600E molecular testing in 4041 patient samples was included. One-hundred and twenty cases with/without KRAS or BRAF mutations were acquired. The tissue were immunostained with anti-BRAF V600E (VE1) antibody with OptiView DAB IHC detection kit. The KRAS mutated cases with equivocal immunostaining were further evaluated by Sanger sequencing for BRAF V600E mutation. Thirty cases with BRAF V600E mutation showed unequivocal, diffuse, uniform, positive cytoplasmic staining and 30 cases with wild-type KRAS and BRAF showed negative staining with anti-BRAF V600E (VE1) antibody. Out of 60 cases with KRAS mutation, 56 cases (93.3%) were negative for BRAF V600E mutation by IHC. Four cases showed weak, equivocal, heterogeneous, cytoplasmic staining along with nuclear staining in 25-90% of tumor cells. These cases were confirmed to be negative for BRAF V600E mutation by Sanger sequencing. Overall, IHC with anti-BRAF V600E (VE1) antibody using recommended protocol with OptiView detection is optimal for detection of BRAF V600E mutation in CRC. Our data are consistent with previous reports indicating that KRAS and BRAF V600E mutation are mutually exclusive.

Immunohistochemistry for predictive biomarkers in non-small cell lung cancer

In the era of targeted therapy, predictive biomarker testing has become increasingly important for non-small cell lung cancer. Of multiple predictive biomarker testing methods, immunohistochemistry (IHC) is widely available and technically less challenging, can provide clinically meaningful results with a rapid turn-around-time and is more cost efficient than molecular platforms. In fact, several IHC assays for predictive biomarkers have already been implemented in routine pathology practice. In this review, we will discuss: (I) the details of anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) and proto-oncogene tyrosine-protein kinase ROS (ROS1) IHC assays including the performance of multiple antibody clones, pros and cons of IHC platforms and various scoring systems to design an optimal algorithm for predictive biomarker testing; (II) issues associated with programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) IHC assays; (III) appropriate pre-analytical tissue handling and selection of optimal tissue samples for predictive biomarker IHC.

Immunohistochemical staining for p16 and BRAFV600E is useful to distinguish between sporadic and hereditary (Lynch syndrome-related) microsatellite instable colorectal carcinomas

DNA mismatch repair (MMR) protein analysis by immunohistochemistry (IHC) can identify colorectal cancer (CRC) with microsatellite instability (MSI). As MLH1-deficient CRC can be hereditary or sporadic, markers to distinguish between them are needed. MLH1 promoter methylation assay is the reference method; however, sometimes, it is challenging on formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue samples. We assessed by IHC the expression of BRAFV600E, p16, MGMT, and CDX2 in 55 MLH1-deficient MSI CRC samples (of which 8 had a germline MLH1 mutation) to determine whether this panel differentiates between sporadic and hereditary CRCs. We also analyzed MLH1 promoter methylation by methylation-specific PCR and pyrosequencing and BRAF status by genotyping. None of the hereditary CRCs showed MLH1 methylation, BRAF mutation, BRAFV600E-positive immunostaining, or loss of p16 expression. We detected MLH1 promoter methylation in 67 % and a BRAF mutation in 42 % of CRC, all showing MLH1 promoter methylation. BRAFV600E IHC and BRAF genotyping gave concordant results in all but two samples. Loss of expression of p16 was found in 30 % of CRC with methylation of the MLH1 promoter, but its expression was retained in all non-methylated and part of MLH1-methylated tumors (100 % specificity, 30 % sensitivity). CDX2 and MGMT expression was not associated with MLH1 status. Thus, BRAFV600E and p16 IHC may help in differentiating sporadic from hereditary MLH1-deficient CRC with MSI. Specifically, p16 IHC might be used as a surrogate marker for MLH1 promoter methylation, because all p16-negative CRCs displayed MLH1 methylation, whereas hereditary CRCs were all p16-positive.

Assessment of Melanocyte Density in Anorectal Mucosa for the Evaluation of Surgical Margins in Primary Anorectal Melanoma

OBJECTIVES

Accurate histopathologic evaluation of surgical resection margins for anorectal melanoma (AM) is diagnostically challenging but essential to clinical management. We studied intraepithelial melanocyte density and growth pattern in anorectal mucosa and BRAF V600E mutation status in AM compared to controls.

METHODS

Histomorphology and melanocytic immunostains, microphthalmia transcription factor (MITF) and human melanoma black 45 (HMB45), were evaluated. Utility of VE1 immunostaining for determination of BRAF V600E mutation status was studied.

RESULTS

Immunostains aid in the distinction between "trailing" melanoma in situ (MIS) and benign melanocyte hyperplasia (BMH), by facilitating assessment of melanocyte density, and evaluation of nuclear atypia and growth pattern. While respective melanocyte densities overlapped, "trailing" MIS could be distinguished by melanocyte nuclear atypia and near confluent growth, compared to the banal cytology and scattered growth of BMH.

CONCLUSIONS

In the histopathologic assessment of AM resections, MITF and HMB45 immunostains aid in distinguishing between "trailing" MIS and BMH, by highlighting melanocyte density, nuclear atypia, and growth pattern, with the latter two being reliable features. VE1 showed nonspecific immunopositivity in anorectal glandular epithelium, a potential diagnostic pitfall when assessing BRAF mutation status.

BRAF V600E mutation-specific antibody: A review

The significance of BRAF mutations in neoplasia was first recognized in 2002 when mutations were discovered in a broad range of cancers. Numerous subsequent studies expanded our understanding of BRAF V600E as a critical diagnostic, prognostic, and predictive biomarker in many cancers. Additionally, the advent of small-molecule inhibitors of BRAF V600E rendered assessment of BRAF mutation status essential in tumors such as melanoma. In clinical practice, evaluation of BRAF mutation status has routinely been performed by DNA-based assays utilizing polymerase chain reaction (PCR). However, molecular testing is not available at many hospitals since it is time-consuming, expensive, and requires expertise in molecular techniques. The first BRAF V600E-specific antibody was reported in 2011 (clone VE1). A purified version of this antibody as well as a second monoclonal antibody targeted to BRAF V600E is now commercially available. In this review, clinicopathologic characteristics associated with BRAF-mutant tumors will be highlighted, and the prognostic and predictive implications of a BRAF V600E mutation will be discussed with a focus on melanoma, thyroid carcinoma and colorectal carcinoma. Additionally, we will review the correlation between immunohistochemistry and molecular results and deliberate how BRAF immunohistochemistry might be utilized in the evaluation of these tumors.